Adelman Calls for Congressional Cuts to Foreign Aid Budgets

Writing at Foreign Policy, Ken Adelman, asserts that support for the U.S. foreign assistance budget is misguided and that arguments in support of these programs become “shallower” upon closer investigation. He argues that: “Four of the largest U.S. foreign-aid recipients today — Egypt, Israel, Pakistan, and Afghanistan — all take contrary positions on issues of critical importance to the White House.”  Adelman also criticizes a recent article by Joseph Nye, stating that Nye’s argument over the relationship between foreign aid and the U.S.’s ability  influence decisions in these countries is “unclear at best.”  He cites Israel as an example as “Israel, rebuffs Washington constantly, on momentous issues of peace,” and is also the “No. 1 recipient of U.S. aid.”  Adelman argues that countries initially view foreign aid with gratitude, but eventually with “entitlement.” On the issue of development assistance, Adelman believes that the top recipients of U.S. foreign assistance have not “developed all that much” and if they did it “could be due to other factors.” In closing he argues that the U.S. “soft power” namely the State Department has failed to effectively fund “modern-day freedom fighters” in Libya, Iran, Syria and Egypt.